Excise duty valuation at clearance bars refund claim after later price reduction without a specific government undertaking.

Excise duty liability crystallises at the time goods are cleared from the factory gate, using the price then prevailing. A later reduction in price, even if prompted by a Government direction, does not by itself alter the accrued duty or create a right to refund on the differential. Refund is sustainable only where there is a specific agreement or undertaking with the Government covering duty relief on the reduced price, and no such arrangement was shown.

---

---

Issues: Whether excise duty was payable on the price prevailing on the date of removal of the goods, and whether a subsequent reduction in price, even if directed by the Government, entitled the assessee to refund of duty on the differential.

Analysis: The applicable excise scheme fixed liability by reference to the rate and price obtaining when the goods were cleared from the factory gate. Once the assessee removed the goods on the declared classification and price, the duty became payable on that basis. A later fall in price, for any reason, did not affect the already-accrued liability. The claimed refund could arise only if there was a specific agreement or undertaking with the Government to refund duty on the reduced price, which was not shown.

Conclusion: The claim for refund was not sustainable, and the assessee failed on the issue.

Final Conclusion: Excise duty liability was held to crystallise at the time of removal on the then prevailing price, and a later rollback in price did not justify refund of duty on the differential.

Ratio Decidendi: For excise valuation, duty is chargeable on the price prevailing at the time of clearance, and a subsequent reduction in price does not, by itself, create a right to refund of duty on the difference.

---